Uncertainty about the status of the currency underscores the risks involved

There appears to be some confusion about the possible financial consequences of Scottish independence. Last week an anonymous minister claimed that Scotland would keep the pound if it walked away from the Union – a statement that must have put joy in the heart of Alex Salmond, who is keen to play down the economic impact of going it alone. It seemed to confirm his accusation that the pro-Union side has engaged in “bluff, bluster and bullying” as part of its campaign.

But the Government was quick to correct the record. In a joint statement with Danny Alexander, the Treasury Chief Secretary, George Osborne ruled out the possibility of a currency union and reasserted that independence would mean leaving the pound. This was followed by an identical statement issued from No 10.

If all of these statements seem like overkill, it is because the polls appear to be narrowing and there is growing fear that Scotland could be slowly edging towards the nationalist position. If the pro-Union side wants to win and win convincingly, it is going to have to improve its game – to root its arguments in a mixture of honesty about the economic downside to independence and a passionate case for staying together.

Ultimately, uncertainty about the status of the currency underscores the risks involved in independence. Of course, the future of Scotland is in the hands of the Scottish people and, if they wish to do so, they have every right to carve out a destiny separate from Britain. But this romantic endeavour will have a real-world impact upon savings, jobs, defence and Scotland’s membership of the EU. The Scottish voters need to have all these facts at their disposal before making their historic, potentially costly choice.